could b a nic bik

I don't agree that the growing use of homophones is efficient (your - you're, defunked - defunct, etc.). I think it is the manifestation of linguistic ignorance and it troubles me. I believe that the linguistic and the conceptual are linked and that a diminution of the former leads to the diminution of the latter.

Nice catch.

Personally I dislike the use of apostrophes in this way. I tend, too, to eschew the use of "but" to begin a sentence.

Is that "a while" or "awhile"?

Neal

Henny Penny Apocalyptic Nonsense. That's been a concern for at least 200 years, probably more. I'm not sure we're any less conceptual now than we were then. (Lookey! I used the the 'right' spelling of then and than!)

All I can say is "conjunction junction what's your function?" - schoolhouse rock 1974 (ish)

Or witness the growing trend of turning nouns into verbs instead of selecting the right verb ("impacts" being one of my least favorite examples). I agree that impoverishment of language limits expression, especially of subtle and complex phenomena. On the other hand, language isn't static, and renewed complexity does tend to emerge from homogeneity in a ying/yang sort of way.

As the object of a prepositional phrase, "a while" is correct.

I think new precision inevitably emerges as tools follow tasks, but I do think something is lost when, for example, a phrase like "on the horns of a dilemma" begins to describe any and every difficult position or decision.
Edit: Sorry, didn't mean to comment on myself, at least in public.

I agree with Picchio that perhaps you just don't get it.

Before this thread is locked, I'm going to posit that there's a strong correlation between those who act as grammar marms online, and those who prefer period correct builds.

Or, when the distinction between the literal and the figurative is lost. "Literally" now seems to mean something like "amazingly".

What exactly don't I get? That you're superior in some fashion to others?

I will posit a correlation between those that use ad hominem attacks and...

Those that, or those who? Ah, the deterioration of civilization!

Instead of engaging in a rational, logical discussion, you attacked and criticized.

I think your editing suggestions might be interpreted in a similar way by certain posters.

People, PLEASE!

Wow. We are supposed to be attacking Joe E. for his crazy buying of all bikes that are for sale in California. None of which he likes or that fit.... NOT arguing about punctuation and syntax.

vjp

Let me just say that:
1) I prefer period correct builds (but don't insist on them.)
2) I am not a grammar marm online.
3) My comments about not getting it had nothing to do with whether or not the King's English is falling into the abyss. In fact, JunkYardBike and I are now BFF's (note use of apostrophe) since his well-known "Southern Hemisphere" post. My man does get it.
4) I have extensively studied linguistics and, especially, semiotics, but that ain't why I'm here.
5) Some of my best friends are homophones.
6) Good point about "literal" - "literally" often means what "figuratively" used to - "The peloton literally exploded." Sometimes, though, the semantic content of a word expands to embrace a former metaphorical usage - in which case the figurative becomes the literal. This kind of thing happens all the time.

You're skewing my data. Thanks for the laughs, though. I do appreciate the correlation between a quick wit and language fluency.

I think your all nut's.

(I'm hoping you did that on purpose)

What the hell is going on in this thread?



Oh, never mind. That explains it.

-Kurt

this thread is both pretentious, and stupid. I like it. Just as a Joe thread should be.